logo Sign In

DVD-BOY

User Group
Members
Join date
20-Sep-2004
Last activity
14-Jun-2025
Posts
458

Post History

Post
#123687
Topic
DVD Cover Collection
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/123687/action/topic#123687
Time
The huge DVD Cover thread seems to have gone MIA, and I didn't want to hijack anyone else's DVD Cover thread so I thought I would start my own. Feel free to let it drop off the bottom of the boards as quickly as possible

My intention is to produce a collection of covers for most of the DVDs available, all following the same design so they should look nice on the shelf next to each other. The colour schemes break down as follows:

The Movies - Gold Text on Black

    Episode I: The Phantom Menace
    Episode II: Attack of the Clones
    Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
    Episode IV: A New Hope
    Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
    Episode VI: Return of the Jedi


Expanded Universe - Silver Text on Black

    Clone Wars
    Ewok Movies
    Droids Cartoon
    Ewok Cartoon
    Star Wars Holiday Special
    New TV Series...


Factual - Blue Text on White

    VH1: When Star Wars Ruled the World
    Star Wars Casting Tapes
    Deleted Magic
    bh001: Clapperboard - The Empire Strikes Back Special
    bh002: Horizon - How To Film The Impossible
    bh003: The Mythology Of Star Wars
    bh004: From Star Wars To Star Wars: The Story Of Industrial Light & Magic
    bh005: The A To Z Of Star Wars Episode II: Attack Of The Clones
    bh006: When Star Wars Ruled The World
    bh007: Star Wars: Heroes & Villains
    bh008: Star Wars: Feel The Force
    BLAK0034 - 33rd AFI Life Achievement Award: A Tribute to George Lucas
    The Making of a Trilogy
    Bonus Material (Official 2004 DVD)
    A Musical Journey


And many more, I guess...

Additional / Fan-based - Black Text on White

    The Phantom Edit
    Balance of the Force
    Clone War
    TROOPS
    R2-D2: Beneath the Dome
    Return of the Ewok & Other Little Films


For the 'movies' and 'expanded universe' covers, I intend to leave the information as generic as possible, so that they can be used with whatever version you see fit. For the factual releases, I will include all the relevant credits (Rikter, Baby-Hum, OCP...). If the same content has been released twice ('When Star Wars ruled the World' for example), I will either credit both on the back of the cover, or do seperate versions.

Here are previews of the current covers:

http://img23.imagevenue.com/loc27/th_988_01_TPM.jpg The Phantom Menace http://img29.imagevenue.com/loc36/th_3c3_02_AOTC.jpg Attack of the Clone http://img28.imagevenue.com/loc219/th_c68_03_ROTS.jpg Revenge of the Sith

http://img38.imagevenue.com/loc270/th_436_04_ANH.jpg A New Hope http://img17.imagevenue.com/loc142/th_e68_05_TESB.jpg The Empire Strikes Back http://img23.imagevenue.com/loc153/th_cbe_06_ROTJ.jpg Return of the Jedi

http://img13.imagevenue.com/loc225/th_295_07_EWOK.jpg Ewok Movies http://img12.imagevenue.com/loc163/th_3c7_08_CLONEWARS.jpg Clone Wars

Update - 30/07/05

Here are the first four Babyhum covers - BH003 & BH004 are currently missing screengrabs, which I will fix when I have finished downloading them

http://img36.imagevenue.com/loc239/th_87e_09_BH001.jpg BH001 http://img38.imagevenue.com/loc221/th_64e_10_BH002.jpg BH002 http://img36.imagevenue.com/loc102/th_f82_11_BH003.jpg BH003 http://img18.imagevenue.com/loc75/th_2d3_12_BH004.jpg BH004

In terms of design I intend to keep them all quite simple, so that they do not take too long to produce. I will produce all of the covers with Fox logos, because they will be against solid colour backgrounds and easy to remove by people who don't want them there

I can also produce Babyhum covers without the special features for those of us who downloaded the 'program only' versions if there is enough demand - again, the text is against a solid white background so it should be an easy task for anyone.

All comments greatly appreciated. What titles should I add?

DVD-Boy
PhotoBucket Album Here
Post
#122561
Topic
A word to the Myspleeners.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/122561/action/topic#122561
Time
Personally, I'm easy with both ISO and VIDEO_TS folders, although I do remember a number of posts concerning burning DVDs with Jacket_P folders, so I can see how ISO images remove a lot of grief...

With regards to reseeding, considering how cheap DVD-Rs are these days, I personally burn a Video disc to watch and a data disc with the .torrent file to archive for later seeding if needed.
Post
#116624
Topic
The Indiana Jones Project (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/116624/action/topic#116624
Time
I have to agree with digitalfreaknyc, one doc per DVD at the best quality (ala Babyhum) would be fantastic. If Indy3 wants to do a disc of skits and parodies as well, fine, but I'm really interested in the docs - I have Raiders from when it was a bonus LD feature with the Indiana Jones trilogy, but I wasn't happy with my first capture and have been snowed under with other jobs since.
Post
#104333
Topic
Got the LD rips - Now How Do I Make Them Work?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/104333/action/topic#104333
Time
Also, you're lucky to be part of that project, and have a chance to see the original trilogy in crystal clarity!

I view my videos straight off my computer, in hi-resolution, and that's why the MPEG2 DVD standard doesn't really do it for me.


...

I'm sure Enterprise looks fantastic in 1080i, but I think the point you're missing is that Enterprise is available in 1080i.

The X0 project will offer the best possible quality transfer of the laserdisc, but ultimately Laserdisc has a lower resolution to DVD - and unless the team do an upscale the video will be 4:3 Letterboxed, not 16:9 Anamorphic.

MPEG-4 compression would allow people to distribute these films more easily than DVD (1.4Gb-ish vs 4.35Gb), but the downside would be they would not be playable on set-top DVD Players.

MPEG-4 offers more efficient compression, it does not magically insert detail.


While I must thank ElectricTroy for allowing me to increase my post-count, I am starting to wonder if this isn't becoming some sort of trolling exercise...

Post
#104241
Topic
Got the LD rips - Now How Do I Make Them Work?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/104241/action/topic#104241
Time
MPEG-4, Ra Ra Ra!

Why is it you want to beat us about the head with MPEG-4? Do you assume that the fine people who have been restoring and archiving the Original Trilogy in this community haven't heard of it? That by investing time and effort into films of the late 70's early 80's they are somehow stuck in the same timeframe technology-wise?

Is MPEG-4 a better form of compression than MPEG-2. Yes, no-one is disputing that. No-one disputes that MPEG-2 is better than MPEG-1. It is an accepted fact. Technology improves.

So why aren't the people here using MPEG-4.

Well, which version do you suggest they use: Simple Profile, Advanced Simple Profile, Advanced Video Codec (AKA MPEG-4 Part 10, AKA H.264). I would assume AVC as it is considered to offer the highest quality and hence has been accepted by both HD-camps for the next generation consumer player (along with VC1, AKA WM9-DRMless and MPEG-2). But then there was only a discussion today on the DVD List stating that Sony are using MPEG-4 Part 2 for it's HDCAM systems:

Sony IS using MPEG-4 part 2 video for HDCamSR. They are using one of the high quality profiles that allows the encoding of 4:4:4 at 1920 x 1080.

Do not confuse this with MPEG-4 Part 10, A.K.A. H.264 or AVC. This is the original MPEG-4 video codec that was extended to allow for high quality studio applications.


With regards to XVID, the fact is both XVID and DIVX offer compatibility with MPEG-4. Infact I believe both offer a spec similiar to Advanced Simple Profile. DIVX has moved further away from the spec and has also insisted on sticking with the AVI as a container format, which supposedly doesn't offer the 'flexibility' of .MP4 or .MPG specs (Some people have gone as far as to say AVI containers 'cripple' the CODEC.) Although I haven't tried it myself, I understand that it is possible to extract the video stream from an XVID file and place it within a legal MP4 container.

I would also not consider now to be the best time to start putting all of your eggs into the MPEG-4 basket, especially not as an archival format. Software and Hardware encoders are still coming to the market, and as far as I know none of them offer all of the facilities of MPEG-4 to produce the best encodes (number of B frames etc etc - check Doom9 for all of the techy details)

Probably most importantly, MPEG-4 is an inherently lossy format, and so is not the best way to archive video. How easy is it to edit? What colour information is lost? I would assume considering how relatively cheap storage is today, that projects like X0 will be archived into HUFFYUV AVIs, which is considered one of the best capture CODECS on the
'market'.

MPEG-4 will have its place over the next few years, but at present it makes no sense to step away from MPEG-2 / DVD as a distribution format. People want to enjoy these products on their TVs with a few cold ones (Have you never read Rikter's NFO files). MPEG-4 may make a smaller file to download, hence a quicker file, but at present I can't burn that to a disc to watch in the lounge. DIVX, yes, on some players, but the specs mean it is currently far more restrictive.

DVD has been hugely popular, and has become THE way to watch video content.

On a final note, I shall assume that you are a relative newcomer to these forums, so let me just point to the fact that there have been discussions about whether these preservations should upscale the video to 16:9 Anamorphic from their original 4:3 Letterbox, the issue of cutting-edge video codecs doesn't even reach the table.

And I'm done...

Post
#104153
Topic
Got the LD rips - Now How Do I Make Them Work?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/104153/action/topic#104153
Time
Originally posted by: electrictroy
Originally posted by: RikterThere are aome XVID versions of the OT on the torrent network - BUt why use such a low rez format for these films?

I don't know about XVID, but I do know that MPEG4 will exceed the quality of DVD (mpeg2), given the same amount of space. I've seen HDTV-quality vids encoded in MPEG4 standard that are absolutely gorgeous.

I'm going to check out the BSplayer. Thanks!

troy


You do realise that the DVDs the guys here create are normally based on Laserdiscs, and as such are normally a 'lower' quality than the official DVDs (No offense to DrGonzo, EditDroid and the rest, but you guys know what I mean).

I'm not sure exactly what you believe you are getting hold of.

If you want the best (visual) quality version of the original Star Wars trilogy, I would suggest buying the official DVDs.

If you want to watch MPEG-4 versions of the films: Convert a DVD with the likes of Nero Digital.

Yes, MPEG-4 can offer higher quality than MPEG-2, but I'm assuming until there is an HD broadcast of the trilogy (and even then, it will be the SE / 2004 edition), there will be no better version of the films to download than those discussed here / available at myspleen.

Kindest Regards

DVD-Boy
Post
#99108
Topic
Star Wars: Deleted Magic (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/99108/action/topic#99108
Time
Originally posted by: Jedikev
This DVD will contain some special features ... NOT the making of documentaries, JediKev, since it IS a making of documentary when you think about it.


Ahh, i guess i'll have to buy from star wars to jedi the videotape, anyhow this is gonna a great dvd it shall be exellent. By the way is the "Vader chokes the guard scene" in Jedi in the dvd, just to let you know it would be really cool to see it.


JediKev,

"From Star Wars to Jedi" was released 'originally' on DVD-R by Dr Gonzo based on a video capture by BabyHum. I think another release is planned at some point - keep an eye of the torrents thread.

Unless I'm mistaken, any documentaries released by ocp will be 'originals'.

DVD-Boy
Post
#99104
Topic
<strong>The &quot;EditDroid&quot; Trilogy DVD Info and Feedback Thread</strong> (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/99104/action/topic#99104
Time
Originally posted by: ChainsawAsh
Quick question: does it matter if the order of the files is different? For example, I was under the impression it was supposed to go AUDIO_TS, then VIDEO_TS, then JACKET_P. However, when I try to put JACKET_P into Nero, it forces the order to be AUDIO_TS, JACKET_P, VIDEO_TS, and I can't move JACKET_P anywhere. Does this matter? And how do I put the DVD-ROM content in? The whole "content" folder, or dump all the files in there, or what?

I burned it successfully before, but then I was impatient and said screw it, I want it now, and burned *only* the VIDEO_TS folder contents.


The folders will be written to the disc in the correct order, but most burning apps will display the contents in alphabetical order.

In terms of the rom content, I would keep it in a folder for neatness - I think 'officially' there shouldn't be any files in the root of a dvd-video disc, although I'm probably wrong considering Interactual puts an autorun.inf there. BTW, slightly off topic, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets has no AUDIO_TS folder.

The long and the short of it is that Nero will not / should not let you burn an illegal DVD-Video disc without at least giving you some warning.

DVD-Boy

Post
#96605
Topic
Thought on de-SE'ing the DVD
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/96605/action/topic#96605
Time
Originally posted by: ChainsawAsh
Excuse my ignorance ... but isn't that basically seamless branching?


Unfortunately not.

Seamless branching allows you to to switch between different scenes of different lengths seamlessly.

So it would allow you to contain 2 versions of a film with different scenes, and link together the ones you need:

Chapter 1 (5 mins) | Chapter 2 (5 mins) | Chapter 3 (5 mins) would be version 1.

Chapter 1 (5 mins) | Chapter 2 (15 mins) | Chapter 3 (10 mins) would be version 2.

DVD Maestro would allow you to drop Chapter 2, or play Chapter 3, then 2, then 1 although perhaps not seamlessly.

The other name for Seamless branching is Multi-Story which kind of makes more sense. Remember that Multi-angle is clips of the same length (lightsabre changes between SW77 & SW04) and Multi-Story / Seamless Branching is clips of different lengths (I'm not sure I can thing of a Star Wars related example!)

DVD-Boy
Post
#95731
Topic
Letterboxed Widescreen vs. Anamorphic Widescreen Discussion
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/95731/action/topic#95731
Time
I'm sorry MeBeJedi, perhaps it's been a long day but I'm just not getting the distinction, unless we're talking analogue and digital.

Quoting from Widescreen.org about Anamorphic (In the film sense):

When it comes to movie theatres, anamorphic movies are compressed horizontally. This allows a wide image (up to 2.40:1) to be stored on a standard (1.33:1) frame; however, when you view a raw anamorphic image that has not been expanded horizontally, people look thin and anorexic and circles look like tall ovals. Such a movie is then projected onto the movie screen with a special lens that expands the movie out to its original width on the screen.

So the image is squashed horizontally using a special lense to go from widescreen to regular. When projected it is then unsquashed using another special lense from regular back out to wide. Am I correct in thinking because this is done optically, information is not lost??

Now, Anamorphic DVD:

When it comes to DVDs, anamorphic DVDs are specially encoded to include more visual information than standard DVDs.

Between a 4:3 Letterboxed Movie, and a 16:9 FHA Movie yes this is true.

When an anamorphic DVD is played on a standard 4:3 TV, every fourth line of this extra resolution is ignored.


No problems, but let's ignore 4:3 Letterboxing from now on...

When an anamorphic DVD is played on a regular TV and your DVD player is set for a 16:9 TV, that extra information is restored; however, because that image is meant to be stretched by a 16:9 TV, the result will be that people look thin and anorexic and circles look like tall ovals. Now you can see where these DVDs get the term "anamorphic DVDs".


Ok, so both film and DVD horizontally squash the picture so as to make the most of the regular frame - the only difference with film is that the image can be anamorphically squashed all the way to 2.40:1, whereas DVD is limited to 1.78:1 only.

Both of these share the term "anamorphic" because if you look at the raw image (before horizontal expansion), people will look anorexic, circles will look like tall ovals, and squares will look like tall rectangles.


... there's no 'but'... They both share the same term because the both squash the image horizontally to store a wide-image in a regular-frame. Is film a lossless process, but DVD the information is lost?

Please, someone put me out of my misery, what is the difference?????
Post
#95718
Topic
Letterboxed Widescreen vs. Anamorphic Widescreen Discussion
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/95718/action/topic#95718
Time
A 16:9 DVD is also known as 16:9FHA (Or Full Height Anamorphic)

In terms of Pal resolutions, a 16:9 image is 1024x576 when unsquashed. This is then squeezed to 720x576 when encoded / rendered and flagged as 16:9 so that the image is streched horizontally for 16:9 TVs and squashed vertically for 4:3 TVs.

A DVD Image is never stretched vertically, but horizontally.

An Anamorphic lense distorts the horizontal image so that you can fit a rectangle into a square (roughly speaking), so that you can make full use of the frame. In the same way anamorphic video when put onto digi-beta or whatever is squashed horizontally so that the hight remains constant, with as much detail as possible, but the width is squeezed to fit the new frame.

Film and DVD Anamorphic do the same thing, hence the same name.

DVD-Boy